list_keystores

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists entries, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any potential side effects, pagination behavior, or authentication requirements. For a simple list operation, this is minimally acceptable but lacks depth.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('List all') and immediately specifies the resource and salient attributes. Every word contributes value; there is no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter list tool, the description fully conveys what the tool does, including the resource type and the information returned (alias and expiry date). It omits no critical details for a straightforward read-only listing operation, and no output schema exists to contradict or supplement it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema reflects this with 100% coverage. The description correctly adds no parameter details because none exist. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource 'keystore entries in SAP CPI', adding detail about included fields (alias and expiry date). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_credentials or list_oauth_credentials, which target different resource types.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies a clear use case: when you need to view all keystore entries and their expiry dates within SAP CPI. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous given the resource specificity. No explicit exclusions, but the instruction is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.